Categories

Journal #6 – SupercalifragilisticExistentialidocious

I shall precede this entry by saying that though I read Aristotle’s piece in its entirety, I will NOT discuss it in this entry as it honestly felt so ridiculous reading through it. Not necessarily his ideas, but rather the manner in which he wrote. Could anyone else (beyond all these philosophers) write so much only to say so little? The sections that were underlined in the reading were really the only necessary points when trying to understand Aristotle’s verbosity. Alas, I digress.

I actually really enjoyed the reading on Existentialism. For one thing, it was not incredibly dense (yes, I will continue to display annoyance over this) and it presented clear points while also providing provoking questions. One line that stuck out most with me was:

“What we choose is always the better; and nothing can be better for us unless it is better for all.”

Essentially, then, should not we as the chooser be removed from the in-between? If what we choose is best only when it is better for all, why would we ever choose what is better for us as an individual? Now, that’s not to say that the questions I just proposed are actually how I feel, as there are definitely times where the choices for one’s own benefit is necessary – but this statement seems to suggest that we must always work towards the “greater good”. Yikes, that sounds like some cult saying or something. Regarding the statement again, do we then consider the “all” our first priority before choosing for our own good? Rather, is there a realm where one must care for self over all and the other realm where we do as the statement suggests? I would think so. For example, if I were in a situation where I had to either finish my final project or attend a larger conference as one of the lead coordinators/organizers in order to best support everyone else, what would I be expected to do? For self-care, the final project is far more important to me as it could determine my future, even my future in working as an organizer. One could argue that the statement above applies for long term reasoning, but it definitely does not state out right what it intends.